Why is Valhalla running slower and with poorer graphical quality than on PC please?
I bought into the cloud idea because I wanted to never again have to worry about hardware limitations. Why are we experiencing this? Has google not invested in good enough hardware?
Stadia requires games run at either 30 or 60 FPS, but with a minimum stability requirement to pass QA - so if the game cannot achieve 60FPS more than x% of the time, it has to revert to 30 as the target to prevent latency & stream issues.
If you look at the performance of games across the Stadia catalogue, hardware is obviously part of the equation but there are big discrepancies between games and engines in terms of settings and performance.
At the moment, the main problem seems to be that the Anvil engine isn't really optimised on any platform, but Stadia in particular.
Appreciate you taking the time sir, thank you.
In a nutshell you’re saying there ARE limitations to a cloud service.
Effectively I was wrong to assume I’d escaped the limitations issue and if I want cutting edge gaming I probably should go and buy a PS5 or PC.
OK, decision made. Stadia misled me, big time. Lesson learned. Thanks
I think you may have mislead yourself. I never seen any advertising stating Stadia was more powerful than PS5 or PC.
I think assuming Google’s hardware would be at least as good as a top spec PC was a very fair assumption...
I think there are really only three things you need to make Stadia work really well:
If you have these three things then generally the rest of the hardware shouldn’t limit you, whether new or older spec.
That’s my entire point. There are no limitations my end - high speed fibre, brand new top spec tv etc
I should be getting at least PC spec performance and I am not. I think belies a lack of investment on their end.
This is part of the problem - what do you mean by 'PC Spec'? Are you talking a 4-figure Nvidia 3090 rig? Or a 3-Figure ready-made from Best buy?
If you want the best contemporary experience, then you're going to pay for it.
Paraphrasing a project mantra - "Next Gen, Now, or cheap - pick two".
Google are supplying your hardware for free. They are charging RRP for official digital storefronts on games. The least reasonable part of their pricing structure is that they show no signs of discounting the Pro sub in any way. Economics have to enter the conversation at some point.
I've kept tabs on Series X and PS5, and I've watched the reviews. My gaming experience so far on Stadia has not made me think I'm willing to pay $500 to bridge that performance gap.
Very fair comment. I expected to wave goodbye to limitations. No hardware should’ve equalled no hardware concerns. Alas are we really admitting that is not the case? I.e. Google are not running our software on 4-figure kit?
That’s the root of the problem for me. Moving to cloud based SHOULD have allowed me to break the upgrade cycle. It sadly hasn’t. This was the killer USP to me and in reality we’re accepting Stadia IS just another platform and NOT a revolutionary step.
With Google resources, hardware should never have been any kind of limiting factor. I stand corrected.
The upgrade cycle will remain a thing as long as fixed hardware profiles are a thing. Sony, Microsoft and Nintendo do this because they physically sell that hardware profile and once it's out, it's out. Google have gone the route of a fixed 'profile' to manage the system resources and to give developers a fixed end point to optimise for.
The PC upgrade cycle is a thing, even if people don't see it like that. It's just more frequent with smaller gains each time.
The only throttling that we are aware of with Stadia is that Google will limit the number of accounts available in a specific territory - so once you have a Stadia account, you have access to a Stadia instance whenever you want it.
The system is still in rollout and growing. It's difficult to manage elastic resource when you have a hard physical limit on availability but no stable user baseline. Imagine if CP2077 was a graphical masterpiece that required two Stadia instances. December 10th, Stadia usage pretty much doubles in an instant.
The difference is, the Google upgrade cycle won't cost you anything when it happens. You may not even be aware when it does. You'll just load up a new game and wonder why it looks better than you expected. It's frictionless. No backwards compatibility issues either.
Try running the test below for 5 mins or so:
https://ping.canbeuseful.com/en#ping
if you get a bunch or red and amber lines then you probably have stability issues. If everything comes back green for 5 mins you have a solid very stable connection. Like I say, stability is more important than speed. I have a 500mbps line but if I go to the side of the house where I use a wired access point (ie connected via ethernet to AP then emitting a new wireless area) then I get stability issues because the quality of the access point is much lower than my primary router. If I am in the range of my primary router I can play 3 devices at once on Stadia all wirelessly with unbelievable performance!
Well..... https://youtu.be/BeFnQrgtZ9k?t=192
They did mislead fairly badly if you watch that link for about 1 min.
10.7 Teraflops is still more powerful than the PS5 which has 10.28 Teraflops, clearly this hasn't translated at all to actual performance as Stadia was tied and in some cases weaker in performance than the last gen consoles, especially when you take into account the reduced visual fidelity from viewing a stream instead of a direct native feed.
Having said that, OP could have just checked youtube to see comparisons before buying into Stadia, it's been pretty well known that Stadia doesn't produce any advantages in graphical performance to date.
Also in terms of value for money the subscription for Stadia is only going to be good value for money if they are upgrading their hardware infrastructure and producing improved graphical performance on a more regular basis than the consoles. Because for example if it's another 5 years till the next consoles release, that's $600 of Stadia Pro Subscription (with no physical disc games or console to resell after). And for that $600 you may be paying more to avoid data caps on broadband and also playing games at a much lower graphics preset, lower frame rates, lower base resolution.
It's good if you can't afford the lump sum of a console. If Stadia doesn't announce some major improvements to compete with the next gen consoles soon, you may as well get a console at this point. The fact that Stadia hasn't announced anything to combat the console hype, I would suggest it's going to be at least another year before we see any improvements.
I don't get how people claim that Stadia must compete with next gen performance and stop releasing older games to be relevant because of cost comparisons when part of that cost comparison hinges on the existence of willing buyers for older games and last-gen performance.
Pretty confident there'll be hardware improvements in 2021, anyways.
Xbox Series S it will set the standard for mid-range PC cards as well.
4K-30 fps
It's $ 300 to buy.
Stadia is still more expensive.
Welcome to Series S generation.